Dalpat Singh Nanecha, Bhilwara V. ITO, TDS, Bhilwara

ITA 246/JODH/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8467 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-08-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 25-07-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MISS KAJAL SINGH
• Keywords: Non-deduction of tax; TDS; Set aside
• Section: 201(1); 234E; 200A; 201

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JODHPUR BENCH , JODHPUR BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SING H YADAV, AM ITA. NO. 245/JODH/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015-16 SHRI RAJESH KUMAR NAHAR, 3F-17, R.C. VYAS COLONY, BHILWARA, VS. THE ITO (TDS), BHILWARA. PAN/GIR NO.: ADHPN 7592 E APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA. NO. 246/JODH/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015-16 SHRI DALPAT SINGH NACECHA, 3A-38, R.C. VYAS COLONY, BHILWARA, VS. THE ITO (TDS), BHILWARA. PAN/GIR NO.: ACFPN 0410 L APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI HEMANT CHHAJED (C.A.) REVENUE BY : MISS KAJAL SINGH (CIT) A DATE OF HEARING : 12/08/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16/08/2021 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THESE ARE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE RESPECTIVE ASSE SSEES AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) DATED 21.05.2019 FOR THE AS SESSMENT YEAR 2015- 16. BOTH THESE APPEALS INVOLVING COMMON GROUND OF A PPEAL CHALLENGING THE ORDER PASSED U/S 201(1)/201(IA) OF THE ACT WHIC H HAS BEEN ITA NO. 245 &246/JODH/2019 RAJESH KUMAR NAHAR & OTHRS.VS. ITO(TDS) 2 CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND DISPOSED OFF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. 2. WITH THE CONSENT OF THE PARTIES, THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 245/JODH/2019 WAS TAKEN AS A LEAD CASE FOR THE PURPOSES OF PRESENT DISCUSSION. ITA NO. 245/JODH/2019 3. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. AR SUBMITT ED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED A PROPERTY JOINTLY WITH HIS WIFE AND TWO PARTNERS NAMELY DALPAT SINGH NANECHA AND REETU DEVI NANECHA ON 03.09.2014 FROM UIT, BHILWARA FOR A CONSIDERATION O F RS. 1,26,00,000/-. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ONLY A JOINT OWNER OF THE PROPERTY TO THE EXTENT OF SHARE IN THE PROPERTY A ND CONSIDERATION OF THE PROPERTY IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ONLY RS. 31,50,000/- WHICH IS LESS THAN RS. 50 LACS, THEREFORE, IN TERMS OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194IA OF THE ACT, THERE WAS NO REQUIREMENT TO DEDUCT TAX AT SOURCE WHILE MAKING PAYMENT TO UIT, BHILWARA. IT W AS ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194IA OF T HE ACT ARE NOT APPLICABLE IN THE CASE AND THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE T REATED AS ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT IN RESPECT OF NON-DEDUCTION OF TAX. IN S UPPORT, RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON JAIPUR BENCH DECISION IN CASE OF SMT. SAN DHYA GUGALIA JAIPUR VS. DCIT, CPC-TDS (ITA NO. 77 & 78/JP/2018 DATED 08.06.2018) AND DELHI BENCH DECISION IN CASE OF VINOD SONI VS. ITO, TDS (ITA NO. 2736- 2739/DEL/2015 DATED 10.12.2018). IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE NOT PROPERLY APPRECIATED THE PROVISIONS OF ITA NO. 245 &246/JODH/2019 RAJESH KUMAR NAHAR & OTHRS.VS. ITO(TDS) 3 SECTION 194IA OF THE ACT AND HAS WRONGLY HELD THE A SSESSEE TO BE IN DEFAULT AND RAISED DEMAND OF RS. 31,500/- AND RS. 1 6,380/- U/S 201(1) AND 201(IA) OF THE ACT WHICH DESERVES TO BE SET ASI DE. 4. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE FINDING OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND SUBMITTED THAT AS PER INFORMATION R ECEIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED AN IM MOVABLE PROPERTY ON 03.09.2014 FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS. 1,26,00,00 0/- FROM UIT, BHILWARA AND AS PER OLTAS, NO TAX WAS DEDUCTED U/S 194IA OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WAS ISSUED A SHOW-CAUSE NOT ICE U/S 201 DATED 12.01.2017 AND THEREAFTER, ON 12.01.2018 AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSING OF FICER HAS HELD THE ASSESSEE TO BE IN DEFAULT WITHIN THE MEANING OF SEC TION 201 OF THE ACT. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ASSE SSEE HAS FAILED TO DEDUCT TAX @ 1% AT THE TIME OF PAYMENT OF HIS SHARE TO THE TRANSFER OF THE PROPERTY AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194IA OF THE IT ACT. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS COMMITTED DEFAULT FOR NON- DEDUCTI ON OF TDS ON PAYMENT OF RS. 31,50,000/- WHICH IS OF THE TOTAL CONSIDERATION OF RS. 1,26,00,000/-, BEING THE ASSESSEES SHARE IN THE PR OPERTY. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IN CASE OF JOINT OWNERS OF THE PROPE RTY, THE THRESHOLD LIMIT OF RS. 50,00,000/- IS TO BE DETERMINED PROPER TY-WISE AND NOT TRANSFEREE-WISE AND THE NUMBER OF BUYERS AND SELLER S WOULD NOT MATTER AT ALL AND SO LONG AS THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IS MORE THAN RS 50 LACS, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194IA OF THE ACT ARE APPL ICABLE. IT WAS ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER SO PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH HAS BEEN RIGHTLY CON FIRMED BY THE LD. ITA NO. 245 &246/JODH/2019 RAJESH KUMAR NAHAR & OTHRS.VS. ITO(TDS) 4 CIT(A) HENCE, THE SAME SHOULD BE CONFIRMED AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BE DISMISSED. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN CASE OF SMT. SANDHYA GUGALI A, JAIPUR VS DCIT, GHAZIABAD (SUPRA), SPEAKING THROUGH ONE OF US, WE H AVE DEALT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194IA, THOUGH IN THE CONTEXT OF CONSEQUENT LEVY OF INTEREST AND LATE FEE, HOWEVER, THE LEGAL POSITION EXAMINED THEREIN APPLIES EQUALLY IN THE INSTANT CASE. THE RELEVANT FINDINGS THEREIN READ AS UNDER: 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS AN UNDISPUTED FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ACQUIRED AN IMMOVEABLE PROPERTY WHICH WAS JOINTLY O WNED BY SMT. RASHI HARNEJA AND SMT. RAVINDRA HARNEJA. IT IS ALSO AN UNDISPUTED FACT THAT THOUGH THE TOTAL CONSIDERATION WAS AGREED AT RS 75,00,000, THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID RS 37,50,000/- EACH TO THE TWO INDIVIDUAL AND JOINT OWNERS OF THE SAID IMMOVEA BLE PROPERTY. 8. SECTION 194-IA WHICH HAS BEEN INVOKED IN THE INS TANT CASE READS AS UNDER: 'PAYMENT ON TRANSFER OF CERTAIN IMMOVABLE PROPERTY OTHER THAN AGRICULTURAL LAND 194-IA. (1) ANY PERSON, BEING A T RANSFEREE, RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING (OTHER THAN THE PERSON REFER RED TO IN SECTION 194LA) TO A RESIDENT TRANSFEROR ANY SUM BY WAY OF CONSIDERATION FOR TRANSFER OF ANY IMMOVABLE PROPERT Y (OTHER THAN AGRICULTURAL LAND), SHALL, AT THE TIME OF CREDIT OF SUCH SUM TO THE ITA NO. 245 &246/JODH/2019 RAJESH KUMAR NAHAR & OTHRS.VS. ITO(TDS) 5 ACCOUNT OF THE TRANSFEROR OR AT THE TIME OF PAYMENT OF SUCH SUM IN CASH OR BY ISSUE OF A CHEQUE OR DRAFT OR BY ANY OTHER MODE, WHICHEVER IS EARLIER, DEDUCT AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO ONE PER CENT OF SUCH SUM AS INCOME-TAX THEREON. (2) NO DEDUCTION UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) SHALL BE MAD E WHERE THE CONSIDERATION FOR THE TRANSFER OF AN IMMOVABLE PROP ERTY IS LESS THAN FIFTY LAKH RUPEES. (3) THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 203A SHALL NOT APPLY TO A PERSON REQUIRED TO DEDUCT TAX IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVI SIONS OF THIS SECTION. EXPLANATION.--FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION,-- (A) 'AGRICULTURAL LAND' MEANS AGRICULTURAL LAND IN INDIA, NOT BEING A LAND SITUATE IN ANY AREA REFERRED TO IN ITEMS (A) AND (B) OF SUB- CLAUSE (III) OF CLAUSE (14) OF SECTION 2; (B) 'IMMOVABLE PROPERTY' MEANS ANY LAND (OTHER THAN AGRICULTURAL LAND) OR ANY BUILDING OR PART OF A BUILDING.' 9. A CLOSE READING OF THE ABOVE PROVISIONS PROVIDES THAT ANY PERSON, BEING A TRANSFEREE, RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING TO A RESIDENT TRANSFEROR ANY SUM BY WAY OF CONSIDERATION FOR TRAN SFER OF ANY IMMOVABLE PROPERTY SHALL, AT THE TIME OF CREDIT OF SUCH SUM TO THE ACCOUNT OF THE TRANSFEROR OR AT THE TIME OF PAYMENT OF SUCH SUM IN CASH OR BY ISSUE OF A CHEQUE OR DRAFT OR BY ANY OTHER MODE, WHICHEVER IS EARLIER, DEDUCT AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO ONE PER CENT OF SUCH SUM AS INCOME-TAX THEREON. IT HOWEVER, PROVIDE S AN EXCEPTION THAT NO DEDUCTION UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) S HALL BE MADE WHERE THE CONSIDERATION FOR THE TRANSFER OF AN IMMO VABLE ITA NO. 245 &246/JODH/2019 RAJESH KUMAR NAHAR & OTHRS.VS. ITO(TDS) 6 PROPERTY IS LESS THAN FIFTY LAKH RUPEES. IN OTHER W ORDS, IT PROVIDES THAT ANY PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING TO A RESIDEN T TRANSFEROR ANY SUM BY WAY OF CONSIDERATION FOR TRANSFER OF ANY IMMOVABLE PROPERTY EXCEEDING RS 50 LACS, SHALL BE LIABLE FOR DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE AT THE RATE OF ONE PERCENT OF SUCH SUM. I N THE INSTANT CASE, EVEN THOUGH THE TOTAL CONSIDERATION FOR THE I MMOVABLE PROPERTY HAS BEEN AGREED AT RS 75,00,000, THE ASSES SEE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING CONSIDERATION OF RS 37,50,00 0 EACH TO SMT. RASHI HARNEJA AND SMT. RAVINDRA HARNEJA INDIVIDUALL Y. IN FACT, THE ASSESSEE HAS ACTUALLY PAID RS 37,50,000 INDIVIDUALL Y TO THESE TWO INDIVIDUALS AS DEMONSTRATED BY ITS FILINGS IN FORM 27Q WHICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND SUBSEQ UENTLY PROCESSED AND INTIMATION ISSUED UNDER SECTION 200A OF THE ACT. IN LIGHT OF THE SAME, IN OUR VIEW, THE PROVISIONS OF S ECTION 194-IA ARE NOT APPLICABLE IN THE INSTANT CASE. GIVEN THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194-IA ARE NOT ATTRACTED, THERE IS NO BASIS FOR LEVY OF INTEREST AND LATE FEE UNDER SECTION 234E OF THE ACT AND THE DEMAND SO RAISED IS HEREBY DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. HOWEVER, WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT TDS ALREADY DEPOSITED SHALL NOT BE REFUNDED TO THE ASSESSEE AS THE TRANSFEROR WOULD BE ENTITLED TO CLAIM CREDIT OF THE SAME IN THEIR RESPECTIVE RETURN OF INCOME. 6. AS HELD IN THE AFORESAID DECISION, ON HARMONIOUS READING OF BOTH SUB-SECTION (1) AND SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 194I A, THE PROVISIONS PROVIDES THAT ANY PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING TO A RESIDENT TRANSFEROR ANY SUM BY WAY OF CONSIDERATION FOR TRANSFER OF ANY IMMOVABLE PROPERTY EXCEEDING RS 50 LACS SHALL BE LIABLE FOR DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE AT THE ITA NO. 245 &246/JODH/2019 RAJESH KUMAR NAHAR & OTHRS.VS. ITO(TDS) 7 RATE OF ONE PERCENT OF SUCH SUM. IN THE INSTANT CAS E, UNDISPUTEDLY, THE TOTAL CONSIDERATION FOR ACQUISITION OF THE IMMOVABL E PROPERTY HAS BEEN AGREED AT RS 1,26,00,000/-, AT THE SAME TIME, IT IS ALSO AN ADMITTED FACT THAT THE ASSESSEES SHARE IN THE SAID IMMOVEABLE PR OPERTY IS ONLY 1/4 TH AND THE ASSESSEE IS THUS RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING CON SIDERATION OF RS 31,50,000/-. FURTHER, AS EVIDENT FROM THE FINDINGS OF THE AO WHERE HE HAS HELD THE ASSESSEE TO BE IN DEFAULT FOR NON- DED UCTION OF TDS ON PAYMENT OF RS. 31,50,000/- WHICH IS OF THE TOTAL CONSIDERATION OF RS. 1,26,00,000/-, BEING THE ASSESSEES SHARE IN THE PR OPERTY AND DETERMINING TDS DEFAULT TO THE TUNE OF RS. 31,500/- , BEING 1% OF RS 31,50,000/-, THE ASSESSEE HAS ACTUALLY PAID RS 31,5 0,000/- ONLY. THEREFORE, IN THE INSTANT CASE, WHERE THE ASSESSEE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING RS 31,50,000/- BEING THE CONSIDERATION FOR H IS SHARE IN THE PROPERTY AND HAS ACTUALLY PAID RS 31,50,000/- ONLY, THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT TO DEDUCT TAX AT SOURCE IN TERMS OF SEC TION 194IA OF THE ACT. 7. WE FIND THAT SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE COORDINATE BENCH IN SUBSEQUENT DECISION IN CASE OF VINOD SONI VS. IT O, TDS (SUPRA) WHERE IT WAS HELD THAT SECTION 194-IA(1) IS APPLICA BLE ON ANY PERSON BEING A TRANSFEREE, SO SECTION 194-IA(2) IS ALSO AP PLICABLE ONLY W.R.T. THE AMOUNT RELATED TO EACH TRANSFEREE AND NOT WITH REFE RENCE TO THE AMOUNT AS PER SALE DEED. EACH TRANSFEREE IS A SEPARATE INC OME TAX ENTITY THEREFORE, THE LAW HAS TO BE APPLIED WITH REFERENCE TO EACH TRANSFEREE AS AN INDIVIDUAL TRANSFEREE / PERSON. THE RELEVANT FINDINGS READ AS UNDER: ITA NO. 245 &246/JODH/2019 RAJESH KUMAR NAHAR & OTHRS.VS. ITO(TDS) 8 5.2 AFTER PERUSING THE PAPER BOOK AND THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF LAW, WE FIND THAT SECTION 194-IA(2) PROVIDES THAT S ECTION 194- IA(1) WILL NOT APPLICABLE WHERE THE CONSIDERATION F OR TRANSFER OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY IS LESS THAN RS. 50,00,000/-. HO WEVER, SECTION 194-IA(1) IS APPLICABLE ON ANY PERSON BEING A TRANSFEREE, SO SECTION 194-IA(2) IS ALSO, OBVIOUSLY, APPLICABLE ONLY W.R.T. THE AMOUNT RELATED TO EACH TRANSFEREE AND NOT WITH REFE RENCE TO THE AMOUNT AS PER SALE DEED. IN THE INSTANT CASE THERE ARE 04 SEPARATE TRANSFEREES AND THE SALE CONSIDERATION W.R .T. EACH TRANSFEREE IS RS. 37,50,000/-, HENCE, LESS THAN RS. 50,00,000/- EACH. EACH TRANSFEREE IS A SEPARATE INCOME TAX ENTI TY THEREFORE, THE LAW HAS TO BE APPLIED WITH REFERENCE TO EACH TR ANSFEREE AS AN INDIVIDUAL TRANSFEREE / PERSON. IT IS ALSO NOTED TH AT SECTION 194-IA WAS INTRODUCED BY FINANCE ACT, 2013 EFFECTIVE FROM 1.6.2013. IT IS ALSO NOTED FROM THE MEMORANDUM EXPLAINING THE PROVI SIONS BROUGHT OUT ALONGWITH THE FINANCE BILL WHEREIN IT W AS STATED THAT IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE COMPLIANCE BURDEN ON THE SM ALL TAX PAYERS, IT IS FURTHER PROPOSED THAT NO DEDUCTION OF TAX UNDER THIS PROVISION SHALL BE MADE WHERE THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF C ONSIDERATION FOR THE TRANSFER OF AN IMMOVABLE PROPERTY IS LESS T HAN FIFTY LAKHS RUPEES. WE FURTHER FIND THAT THE MAIN REASON BY TH E AO IS THAT THE AMOUNT AS PER SALE DEED IS RS. 1,50,00,000/-. T HE LAW CANNOT BE INTERPRETED AND APPLIED DIFFERENTLY FOR THE SAME TRANSACTION, IF CARRIED OUT IN DIFFERENT WAYS. THE POINT TO BE MADE IS THAT, THE LAW CANNOT BE READ AS THAT IN CASE OF FOUR SEPARATE PURCHASE DEED FOR FOUR PERSONS SEPARATELY, SECTION 194-IA WA S NOT APPLICABLE, AND IN CASE OF A SINGLE PURCHASE DEED F OR FOUR PERSONS SECTION 194-IA WILL BE APPLICABLE. IT IS NOTED THAT AO HAS PASSED A COMMON ORDER U/S. 201(1) FOR ALL THE FOUR TRANSFERE ES. IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY HIS ACTION SINCE IN CASE OF SEPARATE ORDERS FOR EACH TRANSFEREE SEPARATELY, APPARENTLY, PROVISIONS OF SE CTION 194IA COULD NOT HAD BEEN MADE APPLICABLE SINCE IN EACH CA SE PURCHASE CONSIDERATION IS ONLY RS. 37,50,000/-. THIS ACTION OF AO SHOWS THAT HE WAS ALSO CLEAR IN HIS MIND THAT WITH REFERE NCE TO EACH TRANSFEREE, SECTION 194IA WAS NOT APPLICABLE. HENCE , WE ARE OF ITA NO. 245 &246/JODH/2019 RAJESH KUMAR NAHAR & OTHRS.VS. ITO(TDS) 9 THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A O AND CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN T HE EYES OF LAW, THUS THE SAME IS DELETED. AS FAR AS ISSUE OF CHARGI NG INTEREST IS CONCERNED, THE SAME IS CONSEQUENTIAL IN NATURE, HEN CE, NEED NOT BE ADJUDICATED. AS REGARDS THE CASE LAWS CITED BY T HE LD. DR ARE CONCERNED, THE SAME ARE ON DISTINGUISHED FACTS AND THEREFORE, NOT APPLICABLE IN THE PRESENT CASE. ACCORDINGLY, THE GR OUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE STAND ALLOWED AND AS A RESULT THEREOF, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 8. THE CONTENTIONS THEREFORE, ADVANCED BY THE LD CI T/DR THAT IN CASE OF JOINT OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY, THE THRESHOLD LIMIT OF RS. 50,00,000/- IS TO BE DETERMINED PROPERTY-WISE A ND NOT TRANSFEREE- WISE CANNOT BE ACCEPTED. 9. IN LIGHT OF AFORESAID FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND FOLLOWING THE CONSISTENT POSITION TAKEN BY VARIOUS BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL, THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE HELD AS ASSESSEE I N DEFAULT ON ACCOUNT OF NON-DEDUCTION OF TAX U/S 194IA OF THE ACT AND TH EREFORE, THE DEMAND OF RS. 31,500/- AND RS. 16,380/- U/S 201(1) AND 201 (IA) OF THE ACT IS HEREBY SET ASIDE. ITA NO. 246/JODH/2019 10. BOTH THE PARTIES SUBMITTED THAT THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THIS APPEAL IS EXACTLY IDENTICAL TO FAC TS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN ITA NO. 245/JODH/2019 AND THEREFORE, CO NTENTIONS AS ADVANCED BY THE RESPECTIVE PARTIES IN ITA NO. 245/J ODH/2019 MAY BE CONSIDERED. ITA NO. 245 &246/JODH/2019 RAJESH KUMAR NAHAR & OTHRS.VS. ITO(TDS) 10 11. HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PURUSED THE MATERIA L AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ADMITTEDLY AND UNDISPUTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING RS 31,50,000/- BEING THE CONSIDERATION FOR H IS 1/4 TH SHARE IN THE IMMOVEABLE PROPERTY AND HAS ACTUALLY PAID RS 31,50, 000/- ONLY, THEREFORE, FOLLOWING OUR FINDINGS AND DIRECTIONS CO NTAINED IN ITA NO. 245/JODH/2019, THERE WAS NO REQUIREMENT TO DEDUCT T AX AT SOURCE IN TERMS OF SECTION 194IA OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE CAN NOT BE HELD AS ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT ON ACCOUNT OF NON-DEDUCTION OF TAX U/S 194IA OF THE ACT AND THEREFORE, THE DEMAND OF RS. 31,500/- AND R S. 16,380/- U/S 201(1) AND 201(IA) OF THE ACT IS HEREBY SET ASIDE. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE RESPE CTIVE ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16/08/2021. SD/- SD/- ( SANDEEP GOSAIN ) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JODHPUR DATED:- 16/08/2021. *SANTOSH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT- SHRI RAJESH KUMAR NAHAR, BHILWARA. SHRI DALPAT SINGH NANECHA, SHILWARA. 2. THE RESPONDENT- ITO(TDS), BHILWARA. 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) ITA NO. 245 &246/JODH/2019 RAJESH KUMAR NAHAR & OTHRS.VS. ITO(TDS) 11 5. DR, ITAT, JODHPUR. 6. GUARD FILE { ITA NO. 245 &246/JODH/2019} BY ORDER, ASST. REGISTRAR